King v. King

District Court of Appeal of Florida

King v. King

546 So. 2d 464, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1769, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4205, 1989 WL 81747

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 26, 1989

DocketNo. 89-0521

StatusPublished

This text of 546 So. 2d 464 (King v. King) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

King v. King, 546 So. 2d 464, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1769, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4205, 1989 WL 81747 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have not been provided with a sufficient record to permit us to make a determination whether the conditions precedent to the issuance of a temporary injunction were performed; however, we find the order containing the injunction facially insufficient. We therefore reverse and remand to permit either party, if he or she is so inclined, to apply for an injunction and we direct compliance with rule 1.160, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, and section 741.-30, Florida Statutes (1987), should it be appropriate to grant such application.

HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and STONE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We have not been provided with a sufficient record to permit us to make a determination whether the conditions precedent to the issuance of a temporary injunction were performed; however, we find the order containing the injunction facially insufficient. We therefore reverse and remand to permit either party, if he or she is so inclined, to apply for an injunction and we direct compliance with rule 1.160, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, and section 741.-30, Florida Statutes (1987), should it be appropriate to grant such application.

HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and STONE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

546 So. 2d 464, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1769, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4205, 1989 WL 81747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-king-fladistctapp-1989.